Evidence of meeting #59 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was physicians.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

June Dewetering  Analyst
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Suzie Cadieux
John Lawford  Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Terry Campbell  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Bankers Association
Brigitte Goulard  Deputy Commissionner, Financial Consumer Agency of Canada
Scott Chamberlain  Director of Labour Relations, General Counsel, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
Fabiano A.S. Taucer  Head of Diagnostic Imaging, Montfort Hospital, Ontario Association of Radiologists
Ray Foley  Executive Director, Ontario Association of Radiologists
Jacques St-Amant  Consultant, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
Aaron Wudrick  Federal Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Marshall Schnapp  Ombudsman, ADR Chambers Banking Ombuds Office
Angella MacEwen  Senior Economist, Canadian Labour Congress
John Feeley  Vice-President, Member Relevance, Canadian Medical Association
Laura Tamblyn Watts  Senior Fellow and Staff Lawyer, Canadian Centre for Elder Law
Richard Davies  Professor, Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Canadian Medical Association

4:20 p.m.

NDP

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Thank you.

Mr. Chamberlain, I have a quick question for you.

In principle, we aren't opposed to adhering to the criteria developed by the OECD on the BEPS, or base erosion and profit shifting. Might this give us a false sense of security? For example, Canada adhered to certain treaties, tax treaties or tax information exchange treaties. It seems to provide confidence to the fact that Canada is taking action to limit tax evasion but, ultimately, these measures have an impact that is sometimes contrary to what is reported to us.

Do you have the same fear regarding the standards established by the BEPS and to which Canada adhered?

4:25 p.m.

Director of Labour Relations, General Counsel, Association of Canadian Financial Officers

Scott Chamberlain

Yes, absolutely. The OECD is a good base as I explained, but only 10% of the multinational entities are going to be captured by it. The vast majority of countries will not be participating in the county-by-county reporting because they don't have the capacity to do so, and so we will not have that information.

It is a good base to improve on, but we'll find that it's very ineffectual initially until more countries are able to participate in country-by-country reporting. I do think it creates a false sense of security. There's much more work to be done, but we'll give credit where credit's due that at least this is a beginning, a baby step.

We feel Canada needs to take the lead in supporting those countries, many of which are tax havens, in being able to build up the capacity to report, because in the end, country-by-country reporting is about Canada knowing which corporation is paying tax here and what tax they are paying in other countries. That's the core of getting at tax evasion, and currently we're not getting that.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Thank you very much.

I have one last question, and it is for you, Dr. Taucer.

Obviously, you are aware of the provisions that affect the deduction for small businesses and the impact it might have. You no doubt spoke with government representatives about this. What response did you receive regarding the concerns you have expressed before the committee?

4:25 p.m.

Head of Diagnostic Imaging, Montfort Hospital, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Dr. Fabiano A.S. Taucer

Could you repeat the question, please?

4:25 p.m.

Executive Director, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Ray Foley

Sorry. I had the French.

4:25 p.m.

Head of Diagnostic Imaging, Montfort Hospital, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Dr. Fabiano A.S. Taucer

I didn't speak with government representatives personally.

4:25 p.m.

NDP

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

I will repeat what I said, word by word.

Obviously, you are aware of the provisions that affect the deduction for small businesses and the impact it might have. You no doubt spoke with government representatives about the concerns you have expressed before the committee. What response did you get?

4:25 p.m.

Executive Director, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Ray Foley

We did meet senior finance department officials who were actually responsible for crafting the legislation. Their concern was about tax policy and not about other consequences—namely, of course, in our area, health policy—or about how the rubber hit the road in terms of how this impacted on the delivery of patient care, or how physicians were organized in order to deliver patient care, or that the synergy of physician groups, whether they be radiologists or surgeons or others, would be affected.

In a sense, tax policy is colliding with both federal and provincial health policies. The federal health policy that governs all health administration across the country is the Canada Health Act. Physicians are in a purely publicly funded health care system, and that's what we're talking about.

The synergy of 20 physicians working together is more than 20 physicians working individually. For the past 30 years, accepted health policy in this country has been about getting physicians to work in teams with other teams of physicians in order to avoid having patients fall between these cracks and to provide a much higher level of care.

That level of care is an intricate combination of general practice, general skills, specialty skills, subspecialty skills, and in tertiary care centres like teaching hospitals, even super-specialized care, in which very unique skills are located that are vitally important for the delivery of the full landscape, the full waterfront, of what patients are expected to receive in our health care systems across the country.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, Mr. Foley.

Mr. Grewal.

November 22nd, 2016 / 4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

I think it's Ms. O'Connell.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

You can go.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Perfect. I can go now.

I'm sorry.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I'll go.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

I appreciate that, Ron, but I don't think you would ask the same questions as I would.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, witnesses, for coming.

With regard to the consumer protection discussion, I want to get your comments, Terry, on the balance between protecting Canadian consumers and allowing the banks to operate. Have we achieved that balance, or in your professional opinion, where does that balance exist, and has any country, particularly in the G7, gotten it right?

4:30 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Bankers Association

Terry Campbell

That's a very big question, so here we go.

This is a moving target. Consumer protection regulations are not a static matter. We have the establishment of a framework here, but that can be built on, and I think Mr. Lawford mentioned that the Bank Act might be another platform in a few years' time.

Actually there's a section in the statute that addresses this. The purpose is to provide uniform protection to customers, to provide uniform supervision, but it's also intended to provide a uniform set of rules so that banks can operate efficiently.

Do we have that balance? I would say that the consumer regime since I've been at the CBA, certainly in the last 10 years, has simply gone up and up and up. I don't say that in any kind of negative way. It's a fact. Compliance budgets have gotten considerably larger, and our engagement with the FCAC has gotten considerably more intense. Are there any other jurisdictions around the world? I go back in history, and I think it's still true. I would not trade any regulatory or banking system regime of any other country for what we have right here and now in Canada. I'm proud of it, and I think that the different elements—bank culture, bank management, supervision, and regulation—work together very well.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Thanks, Mr. Campbell.

Mr. Lawford, do you have any comments on my question?

4:30 p.m.

Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre

John Lawford

Yes, I would trade instantly for the Irish system or the Australian system if I were a Canadian consumer. Both of those countries have a clear financial consumer code.

I'll give you one quick example: guarantees. If you are an older person and you go in with your child who wants to start a business, in Ireland, you're required to have a separate meeting, because you could lose your home to support your child through the love of being with that child. In Canada you sit in the same room. You sign the documents all at one time. They've taken that extra step, because they realize there are often problems such that someone who has been put into a conflict position doesn't know it and doesn't have the right advice.

That's a very concrete example of how they do it better in Ireland.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

In your opinion they do it better in Ireland, but how does that impact their actual banks in doing their business?

4:30 p.m.

Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre

John Lawford

They're still conducting business in Ireland and doing consumer retail banking. I don't know that there has been any loss of business there.

It's best not to mix up financial stability of the institutions with these consumer protection matters. The financial stability and the reserves that banks need and all those other Basel kinds of things are really not the same question as consumer protection. We're talking about what happens when I'm wronged by a bank and I need redress. It's very hard to get in this country. It's very confusing, and my rights are quite limited.

4:30 p.m.

Consultant, Public Interest Advocacy Centre

Jacques St-Amant

If I may briefly add something, it's interesting that the banks actually thrive on using provincial legislation in areas such as providing mortgages, for instance. When provincial legislation enables them to do what they want to do, they're happy with it, but when it might in some ways inconvenience them, then they'd rather not have to abide by provincial legislation. In some cases, that means that consumers will be less well protected than they currently are.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Thank you, gentlemen. I'm sure you'll be happy to know that I'm a strong advocate as well of ensuring that financial literacy is being taught at a much younger age in school, because I think that's also a big component of ensuring that Canadians are protected across the board, and having Canadians know all the right questions to ask their banks when they go in.

My last question is for the radiologists.

I think you're going to be picked on a little bit today, not on purpose by any means.

Do you agree with the Government of Canada estimate that the effect of budget 2016 measures would effectively amount to a very modest increase in the tax burden for affected professionals?

4:35 p.m.

Head of Diagnostic Imaging, Montfort Hospital, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Dr. Fabiano A.S. Taucer

It was certainly not modest for physicians. I don't agree with that. I'm not sure of the figure you used.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

The example would be a physician making over $200,000 in salary. Post-budget 2016, the additional expenditure would be in the hundreds.

4:35 p.m.

Head of Diagnostic Imaging, Montfort Hospital, Ontario Association of Radiologists

Dr. Fabiano A.S. Taucer

If that were the case, I wouldn't be here. You can be sure of that. Our figures are significantly different. Ray can speak to this, but I believe they're in the $30,000 to $50,000 range.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Is this a physician making over $200,000 a year, or a physician making $1 million and the tax burden is $30,000 or $50,000? What number are you guys working off? That's the key to the whole argument.